A major victory against teacher tenure in California!

Well, the verdict is in and some key points of California's Tenure statutes have been found guilty of being very bad to outright un-constitutional!

Two years ago, the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher signed on to represent eight California public students targeting teacher tenure, in Vergara v. California. The case went to trial this year, with the students claiming that the state's education system violates the equal protection provision of the California Constitution.

At issue were state education laws that students said unfairly gave teachers permanent employment, prevented removal of grossly ineffective teachers from classrooms, and during economic downturns required layoffs of teachers based on seniority rather than on their ability to teach.

You read that right. This started by students. Mere students.

It's a MAJOR accomplishment and folks who say people have no power can bite their tongue for this one because these weren't even old enough to vote as citizens, yet just beat down one of the virtual institutions of California's education system.

But in his 16-page ruling, Treu found the evidence of the negative impact of ineffective teachers "compelling."
"Indeed, it shocks the conscience," he wrote.

Citing expert witness testimony, he noted that "a single year in a classroom with a grossly ineffective teacher costs students $1.4 million in lifetime earnings per classroom," and that a teacher in the bottom 5 percent causes students to lose 9.54 months of learning time per year compared with average teachers.

I couldn't agree more about the cost of bad teachers...and they went on to quantify just what it's cost before now to remove them. It's stunning and this is part of a court decision, as recorded public record.

The students further argued that it's nearly impossible to dismiss an ineffective tenured teacher; it can take between two and 10 years, and cost anywhere from $50,000 to $450,000.

Treu agreed that the state's dismissal process is "torturous," and found it "to be so complex, time consuming and expensive as to make an effective, efficient yet fair dismissal of a grossly ineffective teacher illusory."

Source: Courthouse News

Personally, I see absolutely nothing about teaching that justifies tenure AT ALL.

Just about everyone else in society lives on the merits of their performance or they are eventually told to take a hike. No where else have I seen incompetence, criminal fraud and deceit with deception practiced openly with a "what are YOU going to do about it??" attitude like I've personally seen in schools. Both as a student myself in California and as a parent now seeing it in the Midwest.

Let them keep their jobs by doing as good a job (or BETTER, to be realistic in how it normally works) in their 20th year as they were in their 1st or 5th years in a classroom.

If not....Burger King is hiring. Just accept being taught a new trade and serving as many of your former students as you're working with, if you're a crappy teacher or burn out case in the classroom.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Score a win for the students, which is what schools should be all about.

Black eye to the teacher's union that wastes countless dollars on tenured idiots.

It's good to see the tide turning. Tonight has been a night of promising news...

Des

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

This brings my mind back to that documentary "Waiting for Superman"(in which the bias leaned toward charter schools being superior).

This is definitely good news and I wouldn't have thought they'd challenge it from the student angle.

Wow, I'm so glad to hear that this case turned out like this! Didn't think much would come of it when I first heard about it a few years ago.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
...
Personally, I see absolutely nothing about teaching that justifies tenure AT ALL.

Just about everyone else in society lives on the merits of their performance or they are eventually told to take a hike...

Seriously, it's mind boggling that it could exist in an environment where poor merit has a serious negative outcome on society as a whole. Couple that with the abysmal spending per student (my state was second lowest when I was in school) and it's a miracle we can still produce STEM students.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000No where else have I seen incompetence, criminal fraud and deceit with deception practiced openly with a "what are YOU going to do about it??" attitude like I've personally seen in schools. Both as a student myself in California and as a parent now seeing it in the Midwest.

Really?!? Nowhere else? The revolving doors between politics, wall street, K street and the media seem far more egregious examples of "incompetence, criminal fraud and deceit with deception practiced openly with a 'what are YOU going to do about it??' attitude".

I've never seen anything close to it in teaching.

But maybe that's just me.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I knew there'd be a time we agreed on something.

Quality over seniority protection.

a reply to: Moresby

I'm glad you haven't seen it. I'm sure not all schools have some of the examples I've seen, and I'll be the first to say I've also seen some outstanding and very caring people in education. More of the caring then the outright losers with tenure. However, those losers rip kids off and out of pieces of their education they'll never get back and only get one run through to pick up.

One in the system by the tenure concept is enough to ditch it entirely, for how I've always felt about it.

This is good indeed. Sends a message.

I for one think teachers at *ALL* levels should be elected.

That way at least they will have to convince citizens (especially parents) of their worthiness.

This is fantastic!!! Now when a teacher has 20+ years and is making more money we can replace them with lower paid inexperienced teachers. Look at the money the schools will save. Also, as a extra bonus, the teacher will not be able to retire from the school system. So, the money in the teacher retirement system can be retrained by the state. This will really benefit the students as much as no child left behind and common core.
Note: a new teacher with 0 years experience makes about 24k - 35k, whereas a 20 year veteran would make from 45k to 60k depending on the district. So, why keep any good 20 year veteran? It would just be bad business.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

The irony of educating your students to replace you, and your terrible teaching skills is pure beauty in the making. Kalifornia 1 step forward and 37 back. But hey it's nice to see this victory, specially when the sister inlaw is a teacher in the state.

a reply to: Magister1

Please, don't bring the reality into this libertarians wishful thinking-dream.. Lets all hope that teachers like to teach more than they like to make some money, because they won't get that...

On to the fastest road to Idiocracy, HOO!


"Teachers? Where we will be going, we won't need no.... teachers!!"

a reply to: ManFromEurope

If teachers aren't more about teaching than they are about the money, I want them nowhere near a child or a classroom in the first place. Period. End of story. FULL STOP right there.

The best teachers I knew as a kid and the ones I respect and look to for guidance in college now are the ones I can see CARE about their job on a personal and deep level and a couple have said outright, they'd do it free if they didn't require money to keep lights on. It's a passion for the truly GOOD educators, not a job.

The clock punchers and job holders in education can find equally challenging work in the field of accelerated culinary preparation for public consumption. (I.E. Fast Food).

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

That is correct, I would like my teachers having fun teaching, too.

But they should be paid accordingly. Is it wrong wanting to earn a decent salary?


If you pay small money, you will get people doing the job: a small number who are underpaid but incredibly enthusiastic and 99% who will feel that they are underpaid. Which is a bad thing.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

I'd be happy to see teachers paid more. They just shouldn't be there FOR money. Civil Service isn't about being rich and if that was the dream, seek life elsewhere. You'll burnout and be toxic to everyone you touch in civil service inside a few years...teaching included.

However, if we could do one thing, I'd be for paying the teachers among the highest in the labor market. The problem is, the teacher's unions would have me put down like a crazy man and we'd lose half our "teachers" inside 6 months. If the teachers can pass a background, personality battery test and integrity investigation? I'd be for paying a teacher 6 figures. A GOOD ONE would be worth that and more.

Hold teachers to a HIGH standard of both professional and PERSONAL conduct, though. There ought to be at least ONE place that's not a joke these days, and the kids only get one go around to learn everything and a set of values to go with it. If they aren't taught, they will still learn a set ..it will just be the set seeing them doing life in prison on the installment plan, as so many are today.

But hey! They passed their standardized tests..so modern teachers figure it was a job well done on their part, whether the kid is functionally illiterate or not. I'm SEEING this with my own eyes in my sons school. Our system sucks and tenure is an evil within it that needs exterminated.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Could you tell what are the requirements for tenure?
Because, here in Germany you get tenured only on very specific grounds. Okay, as I have seen many teachers in my time, there seemed to be more "relaxed" standards about tenurement in the past..

But nevertheless, the husband of my sister was tenured lately, and earns a fine salary. And he is highly motivated, his pupils seem to love him Therefore, a high salary doesn't contradict being a good, motivated teacher.

I didn't understand the part of

However, if we could do one thing, I'd be for paying the teachers among the highest in the labor market. The problem is, the teacher's unions would have me put down like a crazy man and we'd lose half our "teachers" inside 6 months.

. Does this mean that you don't think your teachers were capable of passing some qualifying tests?
Again, I don't know about the requirements for tenure in the USA. Maybe you could explain those, please?